The race is already crowded. Coakley joins a Democratic field that includes Treasurer Steven Grossman (D-Newton), former Obama Medicare chief Donald Berwick (D-Newton), national security expert and former Globe columnist Juliette Kayyem (D-Cambridge) and biotech executive Joseph Avellone (D-Wellesley). Cape Cod Sen. Daniel Wolf has suspended his campaign while he challenges an Ethics Ruling that could prohibit him from running.

Republican Charles Baker is also running for governor for a second time, and independent Evan Falchuk — another Newton resident — has declared his candidacy.

Do you expect Coakley to chase some of the Dems out of the race? Who is most promising in this broad field?

In general I don’t like prosecutors in politics, because they tend to be too conservative for my liking. A recent good example would be Congressman Kennedy, who opposed medical marijuana and voted in favor of NSA spying on law abiding Americans.

Coakley is a political lightweight, which she proved when she lost the senate race to Brown. I don’t want to give her the chance to loose the Governor’s office to Baker. I also believe she misused the AG’s office for a political persecution, when she went after Tim Cahill, with a case that had no merit. Additionally, she’s done a very poor job overseeing the implementation of the medical marijuana ballot initiative.

She also maintains the mystical AG firearm roster. Massachusetts has the executive office of public safety conduct tests on and approve all handguns for sale in the state. The AG has retained the right to arbitrarily deny FFLs permission to sell a specific handgun even if it passes the stringent EOPS tests. This is why its virtually impossible to find glocks in this state.

Furthermore her office has sent threatening letters to online ammunition retailers who ship ammunition to Massachusetts. This is fully lawful for licensed residents to do, but the result of her blackmail is very few retailers will actually ship ammo to Mass gun owners, so we end up paying a good deal more.

The bottom line is she is abusing her and her office’s authority as AG, and this is not the kind of person we should want as a governor.

Some years back, Coakley, in a blatant act of hypocrisy, prosecuted a Portugese-American club in Peabody for having a men-only dinner. A male candidate for an office spoke, but the female opponent couldn’t, which was a mistake on the part of the club, in my opinion. But Coakley went on the warpath which ended with things like the club members taking sensitivity training and things like that.

“It is troubling that in the 21st century, there are still social clubs and organizations that discriminate against women solely because of their gender,” said Attorney General Coakley.

So, out of curiosity, I Googled women’s professional organizations. Amazingly, there are women’s organizations for almost every profession and job. Especially ubiquitous are women attorney organizations, which she is. They are at the national level and in most states, including ones specifically for black women, Asian Pacific women, etc.

If her actions don’t constitute blatant hypocrisy, then what does? Shouldn’t she prosecute women’s organizations like these? Maybe some people think that some forms of discrimination are okay but others are not.